User talk:Havardj

University of Florida
I was wondering if you'd consider changing your "doormats" comment to something more neutral. It seems you know something about the sports program at U of F, and that, in all, you added balance to the article, but referring to them "doormats" will probably result in a complete revert of your comments, rather than a modification of that sentence. (I would change it, but I don't know exactly what you meant by that comment, which is another problem with it, I suppose). Regards, JDoorj a m    Talk 03:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Indie Rock
Please explain why you deleted my Future of Indie Rock section. The is a definite paradox between being called indie and being on a major label. The term indie was not originally intended to describe a sound but rather a position in relation to mainstream, major label music. That's the rationale behind the comparison to alternative music, as alternative too was intended to describe an "alternative" to mainstream music. First alternative, and now indie, have been incorporated by the major labels due to their potential for making money. This is not to say that a band can't be indie and popular. But a band can't be manufactured by a major label as an imitation of something indie and still be indie. The idea of indie and a major label are antithetical. User:Havardj


 * For starters, the comparison fails. "Alternative" was called alternative because it was outside the mainstream.  The paradox was that it eventually became mainstream, hence "alternative" didn't make much sense.  "Indie", on the other hand, is derived from independent labels.  While some non-indie music is referred to as "indie rock", there will always be "indie" rock because there will always be independent labels releasing rock music, hence "indie rock".  Even if the term is misused to describe major label bands, there will still be "indie rock" in existence.  The paradox isn't there.


 * But a better reason for its removal is because your paragraph constitutes original research. Speculation offered by Wiki editors is disallowed.  Unless you can find another article arguing what you argued, it can't be included in a Wikipedia article, given the basic rules. -- ChrisB 04:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Latin America won!
Joyous | Talk 18:26, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

removal of relevant external links

 * Copied from User talk:Pollinator

Hi! I'm writing in reference to your deletion of the links I added to the Muscadine article. I know that they are commercial sites, but I thought it would be informative to include links to wineries producing this varietal in order to give Wikipedia users outlets by which to learn more about the wine. They weren't intended to be spam--I have no stake in the profits of either winery. Is there a Wikipedia regulation barring any external links containing commercial information? If not, I'd like to either re-add the links or agree on a criteria by which to judge whether commercial sites are appropriate. Best! Havardj 10:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi again. I'm going to re-add the links for now, at least until you have time to respond to my query. Havardj 13:01, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I've removed them; they are clearly commercial sites, with no information that could not be added to the articles. See WikiProject Spam Pollinator 18:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to Wine Project
Havardj, you and Pollinator have made valuable contributions to the Muscadine article. I hope you will consider joining the Wikipedia Wine Project to help expand Wikipedia's quality of wine articles. -Amatulic 21:19, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Las películas de mi vida
You created a stub article, Las películas de mi vida. Could you please expand the article and explain the significance of the novel? Many thanks. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 20:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Flannan Isles
I've been working on a substantial re-write of this page and have much of the material complete, save for the part on the 'mystery'. I note your comments on the Talk page in July: "I'm going to delete the entire mystery section of the article and write another." Is this in hand? If not I'll have a go. I am generally of the opinion that 'Glenhuon' is correct and that 'the sea took them' although the very fact that the subject draws so much attention is in itself notable. Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:01, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Steve Spurrier
Hey Harvardj, I had to go back and review the revert to figure out what happened. Unfortunately, a lot of my wiki-activity is vandal-fighting for the pages on my watchlist and I believe when I saw your edit just remove spaces between paragraphs (and had no edit summary), I just reflexively reverted it thinking it a mistake (not outright vandalism given you had a registered name). My reaction was it made it less readable as one long block of text and surely it wasn't intended. White space is often helpful and easier on the eyes, especially onscreen.

I guess the trick is to find balance between the longer paragraph style of books and the short graff style of newspaper writing (which is what many editors are referecing for current events). In light of your comments and reviewing the section, I realized it needed a lot of work to eliminate unecessary dates and date linking and to generally tighten the prose and make things more concise (suffering from recentism, IMHO) if it were to be a single paragraph. Anyway, I was bold; take a look at it now and let me know if you have any issues with it. WDE and Go Cocks! :-) AU Tiger ʃ talk /work 22:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Wine Project activity
This is a friendly note to let you know that you have been moved to the Inactive members page of the Wine Project. Users are moved to this page when two months have passed without any Wikipedia activity or 3 months have passed without any contribution to a wine related article. The intent of the Participant list is to function as a resource for other editors wishing to get in contact with wine project members for comments or question on Wikipedia's wine article. The goal of this process is to try and maintain the WikiProject Wine/Participants as current and up to date as possible with active and contributing members. Please note that this is not intended to be a negative reflection on your Wikipedia or wine related contribution and it is well known that sometimes outside life can take editors away from Wikipedia for some time. You will always be welcomed to rejoined the Wine Project should you feel that the time is right. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk or on the Wine Project talk page. Best wishes. AgneCheese/Wine 22:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Old news
Hello soon to be Dr. Havardj, time to update your profile. Here's also how I ran into Cuba recently: Punta Brava. For light reading and future reference, Green children of Woolpit. Hope you had a good flight back home. Drmies (talk) 21:17, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Berlin Trilogy


The article Berlin Trilogy has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Redundant to the individual albums' articles and unsourced.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Berlin Trilogy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Berlin Trilogy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Berlin Trilogy & until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:50, 10 November 2012 (UTC)